Finding the most accurate method to measure head circumference for fetal weight estimation.

OBJECTIVE Accurate measurement of fetal head biometry is important for fetal weight estimation (FWE) and is therefore an important prognostic parameter for neonatal morbidity and mortality and a valuable tool for determining the further obstetric management. Measurement of the head circumference (HC) in particular is employed in many commonly used weight equations. The aim of the present study was to find the most accurate method to measure head circumference for fetal weight estimation. STUDY DESIGN This prospective study included 481 term pregnancies. Inclusion criteria were a singleton pregnancy and ultrasound examination with complete fetal biometric parameters within 3 days of delivery, and an absence of structural or chromosomal malformations. Different methods were used for ultrasound measurement of the HC (ellipse-traced, ellipse-calculated, and circle-calculated). As a reference method, HC was also determined using a measuring tape immediately after birth. FWE was carried out with Hadlock formulas, including either HC or biparietal diameter (BPD), and differences were compared using percentage error (PE), absolute percentage error (APE), limits of agreement (LOA), and cumulative distribution. RESULTS The ellipse-traced method showed the best results for FWE among all of the ultrasound methods assessed. It had the lowest median APE and the narrowest LOA. With regard to the cumulative distribution, it included the largest number of cases at a discrepancy level of ±10%. The accuracy of BPD was similar to that of the ellipse-traced method when it was used instead of HC for weight estimation. CONCLUSION Differences between the three techniques for calculating HC were small but significant. For clinical use, the ellipse-traced method should be recommended. However, when BPD is used instead of HC for FWE, the accuracy is similar to that of the ellipse-traced method. The BPD might therefore be a good alternative to head measurements in estimating fetal weight.

[1]  E. Pitman.  A NOTE ON NORMAL CORRELATION , 1939 .

[2]  J. Gardosi,et al.  Routine ultrasound is the method of choice for dating pregnancy , 1998, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[3]  A Huch,et al.  Fetal ultrasound biometry: 1. Head reference values , 1999, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[4]  S. Campbell.  AN IMPROVED METHOD OF FETAL CEPHALOMETRY BY ULTRASOUND , 1968, The Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of the British Commonwealth.

[5]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[6]  N. Dudley,et al.  The importance of quality management in fetal measurement , 2002, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[7]  R. Schild,et al.  Fetal weight estimation by ultrasound: comparison of 11 different formulae and examiners with differing skill levels. , 2007, Ultraschall in der Medizin.

[8]  A. Gezer,et al.  Perinatal and maternal outcomes of fetal macrosomia. , 2001, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[9]  N. Dudley.  A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight , 2005, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[10]  Jason C. Fisher,et al.  Prenatal lung-head ratio: threshold to predict outcome for congenital diaphragmatic hernia , 2012, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[11]  M. Beckmann,et al.  Increased Accuracy of Fetal Weight Estimation with a Gender-Specific Weight Formula , 2008, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[12]  Patrick Royston,et al.  Fetal ultrasound biometry: 2. Abdomen and femur length reference values , 1999, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[13]  R. Schild,et al.  How good is fetal weight estimation using volumetric methods? , 2008, Ultraschall in der Medizin.

[14]  A. Rigby,et al.  The “Lasso-o” tape: stretchability and observer variability in head circumference measurement , 2005, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[15]  D. Mandelbaum,et al.  Association of Head Circumference and Shoulder Dystocia in Macrosomic Neonates , 2013, Maternal and Child Health Journal.

[16]  Renate Huch,et al.  Ultrasonographic fetal weight estimation: accuracy of formulas and accuracy of examiners by birth weight from 500 to 5000 g , 2004, Journal of perinatal medicine.

[17]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[18]  F. P. Hadlock,et al.  Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements--a prospective study. , 1985, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[19]  S. Campbell,et al.  ULTRASOUND MEASUREMENT OF THE FETAL HEAD TO ABDOMEN CIRCUMFERENCE RATIO IN THE ASSESSMENT OF GROWTH RETARDATION , 1977, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[20]  I. Meizner,et al.  Sonographic estimation of fetal head circumference: how accurate are we? , 2011, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[21]  M. Sütterlin,et al.  Comparison of Different Sonographic Methods to Determine Fetal Abdominal Circumference , 2010, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[22]  A. Rempen.  [Vaginal ultrasonography in the first trimester. II. Quantitative parameters]. , 1991, Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Perinatologie.

[23]  M. Wielgoś,et al.  Accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal head circumference , 2011, Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[24]  M. Onis,et al.  Reliability of anthropometric measurements in the WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study , 2006, Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). Supplement.